When it comes to free speech, do you favor the classical liberal philosophy or the Marxist/Neo-Marxist one?

[Anonymous]

Here they are in a nutshell:
Classical liberal: "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it."
Marxist/Neo-Marxist: "Certain voices deserve to be suppressed." This one also emphasizes groups.

Classical Liberal!

Marxist/Neo Marxist!

Not sure.

[Soteris]

I am more practical when it comes to free speech. While some speech should definitely be protected, especially when its against the government, it does not mean that free speech can't be a danger to individuals and they deserve protection against it.

Speech is a powerful tool and as with all tools it can be misused. That includes using it maliciously against other people which can result in them suffering or even ending up dead. Inciting violence for example is a good example but other forms of harassment is also possible. Many people have their lives ruined by malicious use of speech and there is little to no consequences for it aside from a potential legal one.

There is also very little you can do to protect yourself from malicious speech. You are entirely at the mercy of the culprit which means that under unregulated speech anyone can be made to suffer on entirely arbitrary grounds with little to no effort.

[PinkMichae]

How do you know if your being protected from the truth? Who gets to decide what the truth is?

[Soteris]

@PinkMichae There are ways to go about uncovering the truth, I mean that is basically what science is. That said this has very little to do with truth. For example, we have better access to information today than ever and yet it has only resulted in misinformation and falsehoods propagating through our society.

Free speech does not help truth.

[jshm2]

Neither.

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it." - is bullshit, as the courts still punish libel, and some speech/statements are automatically punished.

Certain voices deserve to be suppressed. - is also bullshit as hate groups and extreme views can speak and spread even in the mainstream regardless of laws.

There actually is no such thing as "free speech". What people mean is "speech without consequence" - which doesn't exist - or "free speech, within the law".

[Anonymous]

Classical. The Marxist version is too much like the modern liberals.